YOGENDRA YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME GOVT. OF U.P. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS
/98/2025 · 2025-09-12
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 164228 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 164228 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 98 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
1. Heard Shri Rakesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri S.P. Singh, learned State counsel.
2. By means of the instant application, the applicant is seeking cancellation of the order dated 14.08.2025 passed by the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in Bail Application No.2552 of 2025 ordering release of the opposite parties No. 2 & 3 on bail in Case Crime No.0188 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 352, 109(1), 3(5) of BNS, Police Station Aaspur Devsara, District Pratapgarh.
3. Seeking cancellation of the bail order, the learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the learned Sessions Judge has passed the bail
order without considering the injuries inflicted by the opposite parties No.2 & 3.
4. A mere perusal of the bail order dated 14.08.2025 indicates that the Sessions Judge has recorded in para 5 of the order that although the allegation is of causing injuries by a spade, as per the injury report, all the injuries are simple in nature. Therefore, the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that the learned Sessions Judge has not taken into
consideration the injuries inflicted by the opposite parties No.2 & 3 while releasing them on bail, is incorrect.
5. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the opposite parties No.2 & 3 are threatening the applicant after their release on bail although there is no evidence to substantiate the allegation. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rakesh Kumar Yadav, Hema Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Yogendra Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
6. In these circumstances, there is no merit in the application seeking cancellation of the order dated 14.08.2025 passed by the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in Bail Application No.2552 of 2025.
7. The application is, accordingly, rejected. September 12, 2025 S. Shivhare BAILC No. 98 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench